CVE-2023-30584
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA vulnerability has been discovered in Node.js version 20, specifically within the experimental permission model. This flaw relates to improper handling of path traversal bypass when verifying file permissions. Please note that at the time this CVE was issued, the permission model is an experimental feature of Node.js.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis vulnerability in Node.js version 20's experimental permission model allows attackers to bypass file permission checks via path traversal techniques. The permission model, designed to restrict filesystem access, fails to properly validate path canonicalization, enabling unauthorized file access despite permission restrictions.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Node.js versionRun `node --version` in the affected environmentAffected if Version starts with 20.x (e.g., 20.0.0 through 20.x.x)
-
Verify permission model is enabledCheck if Node.js was launched with the `--experimental-permission` flag by examining process startup arguments or environment configurationAffected if The experimental permission model flag is present in the Node.js launch command
-
Confirm file system permission restrictions are in useInspect the permission model configuration for filesystem access rules (e.g., --allow-fs-read, --allow-fs-write flags or policy files)Affected if File system permission restrictions are defined and active
-
Check path handling in applicationsReview application code for file operations that accept user-supplied paths which could be manipulated for path traversalAffected if Applications process user input as file paths while running under the experimental permission model
Environment is affected if running Node.js version 20.x with the experimental permission model enabled and handling file paths that could be traversed.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedAvoid using the experimental permission model in production environments until a patched version is available; upgrade Node.js to the latest version when the fix is released.
Node.js 20.3.0 or later (or the latest stable 20.x release)
- Verify the current Node.js version by running 'node --version'
- Backup your application and configuration files
- Test your application with the new Node.js version in a staging environment before production deployment
- Upgrade to Node.js 20.3.0 or later (or a version that includes the security fix for this CVE)
- After upgrade, verify the experimental permission model works as expected with 'node --experimental-permission --version'
- Deploy the updated Node.js version to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-30584 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-30584 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data